MR. CHURCHILL AND THE RAILWAYS [To the Editor of the
SPECTATOR.] Ashe's ingenious theory, given in your issue of February 20th, that the railways are being subsidized by the roads is not borne out by the facts. The railway author- ities justly complain that their competitors are being sub- sidized by the State, because they enjoy the use of the national roads without any adequate liability to pay for the enormous damage they inflict on the surface. Part of the cost of the services performed by road transport agencies falls upon the State and only part upon themselves, so that they can often undercut the railways. The latter carry about twelve million tons of road-making material at an average cost of six shillings per ton. If the Government paid half of this charge it would be correct to speak of a subsidy, but the railways are simply performing a commercial service, unaided, on which they make a very poor profit, as the state.r_e it of their net earnings shows. They also carry about one and a half million tons of beer, but the brewers do not speak of subsidizing them,. Railway working expenses absorb eighty- three per cent. of the gross receipts,--so that at most the roadstone would- contribute -1600,0001th profits, but probably considerably less. On the other hand the railways pay £71 millions to local rates, much • of which must go towards the upkeep of the roads.
The statement in the railway meeting -room was made in the course of a debate by an advocate of road transport: Railway business is not prospering. Comparisons should be made with the last pre-War year, 1913, which is taken as the base year under the Railway Act. Thirty millions more tons of traffic were carried then than in 1924'and one-fourth 'of the decrease was in general goods, while the increase of passenger traffic is slight compared with the growth of the population. The net receipts from railway working proper, have dropped /71 millions in the eleven years.—I am, Sir, &c., J. J. CLARKE. 12 Raffley Road, Wallasey, Cheshire.
Previous page
